idb wrote on Feb 11^th, 2010 at 12:17am:

And, in the context of this discussion and by local convention and the general public perception, this is correct - the calls are free, that is there is no cost for making an unlimited number of local calls. We can spend hours debating the ins and outs of the word 'free', and, as is often pointed out, little, if anything is truly free'. In the context of this thread, however, I will maintain that the calling plan to which I subscribe provides free local calls. It is a fair and accurate description.

What local calls are free? Are they all calls within the same area code (and what if you are in an area with an overlay code)? Is it just calls to other subscribers in your town?

[edit]This discussion has been split off from Cost of 0870 vs calling blocked local numbers thread.[/edit]

Dave wrote on Feb 11^th, 2010 at 11:57pm:

What local calls are free? Are they all calls within the same area code (and what if you are in an area with an overlay code)? Is it just calls to other subscribers in your town?

It is complex, and I will try to put something together to provide an accurate description of what is a local call. There are two types of local call - local call (free) which I have been discussing in this thread, and local call (toll), also known as extended calling area. But to answer the question, yes, the local calls of the free type will often, but not always, cross area code boundaries. For overlays, given that there are different types of overlay, I don't have a definitive answer for all types!

In the meantime, the following may be useful to anyone interested:

http://www.usa.att.com/localcallingarea/qsingle
https://www.customerservice.att.com/plancomparison/calltypespopup.jsp
http://www.localcallingguide.com/index.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_access_and_transport_area

I have previously stated that telecoms here are straightforward, and I still maintain this to be true, however the definition of what is a local calling area is not a simple matter to describe.

idb wrote on Feb 12^th, 2010 at 1:29am:

Dave wrote on Feb 11th, 2010 at 11:57pm: What local calls are free? Are they all calls within the same area code (and what if you are in an area with an overlay code)? Is it just calls to other subscribers in your town? It is complex, and I will try to put something together to provide an accurate description of what is a local call. There are two types of local call - local call (free) which I have been discussing in this thread, and local call (toll), also known as extended calling area. But to answer the question, yes, the local calls of the free type will often, but not always, cross area code boundaries. For overlays, given that there are different types of overlay, I don't have a definitive answer for all types! In the meantime, the following may be useful to anyone interested: http://www.usa.att.com/localcallingarea/qsingle https://www.customerservice.att.com/plancomparison/calltypespopup.jsp http://www.localcallingguide.com/index.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_access_and_transport_area I have previously stated that telecoms here are straightforward, and I still maintain this to be true, however the definition of what is a local calling area is not a simple matter to describe.

So a US "local call" isn't necessarily a call to someone who is local? What is it with the use of the phrase "local call" which is quite a source of confusion, whether in the UK or US?  ::)

And a local call can be either free or chargeable ("toll"). So how do you know which it is and why are some free and some chargeable?

I can think of two examples of this sort of thing in the UK, one of which still exists today:

1. The incumbant provider in Kingston upon Hull and Beverley is Kingston Communications (also known as "KC" or "KCom") rather than BT. For residential subscribers, calls to other KC numbers (lines) are free whereas calls to other telecommunications services by other operators are chargeable. I think that the former is the equivalent of the US' "local call (free)" type and that the latter is the equivalent of its "local call (toll)" type. This is based purely on having read idb's posting on how the system works there.

Coming back to the situation in Hull and Beverley, some examples. Where a KC customer calls their neighbour (residential or business) who also has a KC line, the call will be free. However, if the neighbour has a cable (Virgin Media) line, then the call will be chargeable (a toll will ensue). Similarly, calls are chargeable to businesses whose provider is Cable & Wireless. All these numbers, whether KC or another provider, are 01482 ones, but they are not all charged the same.

2. I understand that at one time, UK cable network operators (which have now largely amalgamated into one, Virgin Media) allowed free calls to other cable customers within the caller's local area. So a call to a neighbour with a cable line would have been free, but a call to a neighbour with a BT line would be chargeable.


These are two examples where some local calls are/were free and some are/were chargeable. Are these good likenesses to the system in the US?

Dave wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 12:32pm:

So a US "local call" isn't necessarily a call to someone who is local? What is it with the use of the phrase "local call" which is quite a source of confusion, whether in the UK or US?  ::) And a local call can be either free or chargeable ("toll"). So how do you know which it is and why are some free and some chargeable?

It may be useful to have a map available whilst reading this:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=palm+beach+county,+fl&sll=26.714334,-80.071449&sspn=0.190752,0.397224&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Palm+Beach+County,+Florida&z=10

I will try to illustrate by example. I am connected to the West Palm Beach exchange, although I am not located within the West Palm Beach city limits. The West Palm Beach exchange will encompass several other locations, including what the US defines as (incorporated) cities, towns, villages and (unincorporated) 'census designated places'. The NPA (area code) for West Palm Beach is 561. The West Palm Beach exchange has around 247 NXX (central office/exchange codes) allocated, and each NXX is further subdivided into the XXXX subscriber number to yield the familiar NPA-NXX-XXXX format.

Two adjacent exchanges are Boynton Beach (south of West Palm) and Jupiter-Tequesta (north of West Palm). Boynton has the same NPA as West Palm, ie 561, plus 42 NXX. Jupiter-Tequesta also has the same NPA plus 21 NXX.

The local calling area for West Palm Beach means that calls from West Palm Beach to either West Palm Beach, Boynton Beach or Jupiter-Tequesta are free, unmetered and unlimited. The local calling area is shown in the phone book, known here as the "White Pages".

So let us take an example with reference to http://www.localcallingguide.com/lca_rcdist.php

A West Palm Beach NPA-NXX is 561-201 and a Boynton Beach NPA-NXX is 561-880. Entering the above into the link above shows that a local call will result. This is the 'free' call that I have referred to.


Quote:

From      To NPA-NXX      561-201      561-880 Rate centre      West Palm Beach, FL      Boynton Beach, FL Rate centre V/H      08166/00607      08197/00588 LATA      46018      46018 Distance*      12 miles      19 km Local call+      Y

And for a call from West Palm Beach to Jupiter-Tequesta (561-222):


Quote:

From      To NPA-NXX      561-201      561-222 Rate centre      West Palm Beach, FL      Jupiter, FL Rate centre V/H      08166/00607      08124/00642 LATA      46018      46018 Distance*      18 miles      29 km Local call+      Y

The exchange to the south of Boynton Beach is Delray Beach. The exchange to the north of Jupiter-Tequesta is Hobe Sound. Delray Beach has an NPA of 561 plus 61 NXX. Hobe Sound has an NPA of 772 plus 9 NXX.

Entering a call from West Palm Beach (561-201) to Delray Beach (561-441) and a call from West Palm Beach (561-201) to Hobe Sound (772-263) into the call checker gives the following results:


Quote:

From      To NPA-NXX      561-201      561-441 Rate centre      West Palm Beach, FL      Delray Beach, FL Rate centre V/H      08166/00607      08210/00582 LATA      46018      46018 Distance*      17 miles      27 km Local call+      Y       Call type      ECS

Quote:

From      To NPA-NXX      561-201      772-263 Rate centre      West Palm Beach, FL      Hobe Sound, FL Rate centre V/H      08166/00607      08105/00661 LATA      46018      46018 Distance*      26 miles      42 km Local call+      Y       Call type      ECS

Again, local calls are indicated, but this time, the additional call type of ECS is shown. This is what is known as Extended Calling Service, and again, a summary of ECS is shown in the White Pages.

For West Palm Beach, the ECS area covers calls from West Palm Beach to Belle Glade, Boca Raton, Delray Beach, Hobe Sound, Jensen Beach, Pahokee, Port St Lucie and Stuart exchanges. ECS local calls from West Palm Beach are charged at a flar rate of 25c per call, but are still local. I do not know whether the 25c flat rate applies to other areas.

Taking a call from Jupiter-Tequesta to Hobe Sound. Both are within different counties, and both have different NPAs:


Quote:

From      To NPA-NXX      561-222      772-263 Rate centre      Jupiter, FL      Hobe Sound, FL Rate centre V/H      08124/00642      08105/00661 LATA      46018      46018 Distance*      9 miles      14 km Local call+      Y

This gives a local free call, demonstrating that local free calling crossed NPA boundaries.

Now onto a call from West Palm Beach to Miami (305-201):


Quote:

From      To NPA-NXX      561-201      305-201 Rate centre      West Palm Beach, FL      Miami, FL Rate centre V/H      08166/00607      08351/00527 LATA      46018      46017 Distance*      66 miles      106 km Local call+      N

Even though West Palm Beach and Miami are within the same LATA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_access_and_transport_area), this is not a local call. As to the cost of such a call, further research is necessary as I have been unable to determine this with any certainty for those with basic phone service.

I hope this illustration makes it a little clearer.

Dave wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 12:32pm:

These are two examples where some local calls are/were free and some are/were chargeable. Are these good likenesses to the system in the US?

Very similar with the exception that it does not matter here which entity provides the number. So as long as the NXX are within the same exchange area, it doesn't matter whether the numbers are provided by AT&T (landline and cell), Sprint (cell), or Comcast (a cable provider) or any other provider, the calls from the landline are free.

Dave wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 12:32pm:

Coming back to the situation in Hull and Beverley, some examples. Where a KC customer calls their neighbour (residential or business) who also has a KC line, the call will be free. However, if the neighbour has a cable (Virgin Media) line, then the call will be chargeable (a toll will ensue). Similarly, calls are chargeable to businesses whose provider is Cable & Wireless. All these numbers, whether KC or another provider, are 01482 ones, but they are not all charged the same.

Are there any time length restrictions on free intra Hull calls with KC?

Dave wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 12:32pm:

So a US "local call" isn't necessarily a call to someone who is local? What is it with the use of the phrase "local call" which is quite a source of confusion, whether in the UK or US?  ::)

Something else to consider - if I decided to spend some time in say Seattle, some 2700 miles from West Palm Beach, and take my cell phone along, the call from our home phone to my cell phone would be considered a local call. So yes, the phrase 'local call' is not necessarily what one may think.

idb wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 4:01pm:

Something else to consider - if I decided to spend some time in say Seattle, some 2700 miles from West Palm Beach, and take my cell phone along, the call from our home phone to my cell phone would be considered a local call. So yes, the phrase 'local call' is not necessarily what one may think.

With you so far, but how does the cell operator in Seattle get paid, if not from the call charge. In Europe there are roaming charges paid by the recipient if you use your cell phone out of the area (country) to which it belongs .

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 12:11am:

idb wrote on Feb 14th, 2010 at 4:01pm: Something else to consider - if I decided to spend some time in say Seattle, some 2700 miles from West Palm Beach, and take my cell phone along, the call from our home phone to my cell phone would be considered a local call. So yes, the phrase 'local call' is not necessarily what one may think. With you so far, but how does the cell operator in Seattle get paid, if not from the call charge. In Europe there are roaming charges paid by the recipient if you use your cell phone out of the area (country) to which it belongs .

To some extent, roaming charges still exist here, however many, perhaps most, cellular plans now include roaming (let's not go down the 'free' roaming route) in a typical bundled national plan.

So, illustrated again by example, my specific plan, FamilyTalk Nation 700 Rollover & Unlimited Night/Weekend & Unlimited Mobile-To-Mobile Minutes, its grand title, provides 700 'anytime' minutes, unlimited calls from AT&T mobile to AT&T mobile, unlimited nights and weekend calls, long distance at no surcharge and free roaming on AT&T networks nationwide.

So the West Palm Beach 561 cellphone being used in Seattle is considered to be roaming, however the roaming cost is free/included or whatever definition one is happy with.

A consequence of cellular phone numbers being allocated normal geographic NPAs is that in times of natural disaster, and hurricane Katrina is a good example, cellphones from an NPA affected by a disaster may not function even when many miles from 'home'.

idb wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 12:43am:

...  and free roaming on AT&T networks nationwide.

I would guess that AT&T roaming coverage is close to universal. What happens if your own operator cannot offer inclusive or additional roaming in an area you are planning to visit.

I guess that with no long distance surcharge, it does not matter to you where your cellphone is "homed", although it will affect your callers. Somewhere miles from the risks of natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes, i.e. Washington DC, would seem to be a good choice! - OK perhaps not.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 2:22am:

idb wrote on Feb 15th, 2010 at 12:43am: ...  and free roaming on AT&T networks nationwide. I would guess that AT&T roaming coverage is close to universal. What happens if your own operator cannot offer inclusive or additional roaming in an area you are planning to visit.

I think you are correct. It may even be completely universal, but hasn't always been that way. A quick check of a recent bill from December 2009, when I was, in fact, visiting DC, and one from 2005 shows that the roaming itemization has been dropped, and there is now no indication that the cell used was outside the 'home' area. I vaguely recall that Cingular, which became AT&T, had a clause that it had the right to terminate one's plan if three successive bills contained 50% or greater in roamed calls (or something similar to this). Plans now appear to be national, although some legacy contracts may exist. I also recall, again vaguely, subscribing to Verizon Wireless in 2004 for around a week. Service didn't work too well, so I abandoned it. Domestic roaming charges, even in my own area, were possible. According to http://support.vzw.com/faqs/Wireless%20Service/faq_domestic_roaming.html, domestic roaming still exists, but I do not believe that it is common. Verizon in a non-GSM system and the concept of roaming seems a little more complex than with a GSM facility.


SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 2:22am:

I guess that with no long distance surcharge, it does not matter to you where your cellphone is "homed", although it will affect your callers. Somewhere miles from the risks of natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes, i.e. Washington DC, would seem to be a good choice! - OK perhaps not.

Exactly. Someone moving from Seattle to West Palm Beach, and bringing their number with them will have a non-local phone number (relative to West Palm) and therefore long-distance charges on a landline without a bundled package. The near ubiquitous use of inclusive cellular plans means that, to many, it doesn't matter. I believe the snow has finally stopped in DC.

Sorry for the delay in responding. I think this is an interesting discussion that is worth continuing.



idb wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 2:18pm:

Even though West Palm Beach and Miami are within the same LATA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_access_and_transport_area), this is not a local call. As to the cost of such a call, further research is necessary as I have been unable to determine this with any certainty for those with basic phone service.

I have read about and appreciate "intraLATA" (within the same LATA) and "interLATA" (crosses boundary between two LATAs) terms. From what I can understand, it would appear that the LATAs have been drawn around the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs) to prevent them from providing connections between different LATAs. So where the same RBOC operates the network in neighbouring LATAs, it is restricted in that it cannot provide a link between the two and must yield to another provider, a IXC (InterXchange Carrier), for which there will be a cost.

The term "local call (free)" would perhaps be clearer if it were just referred to as "local call" and most importantly, "local call (toll)" would be more easily understood if it were termed a "regional call". These terms are like what we used to have in the UK and actually mean something.

What about those who live near to LATA boundaries? For a call to a destination which is only a short distance from them but which is within another LATA, will it be classed as a type of "local" call or will it be a "long distance" one because it requires use of the IXC?



idb wrote on Feb 14^th, 2010 at 2:32pm:

Dave wrote on Feb 14th, 2010 at 12:32pm: Coming back to the situation in Hull and Beverley, some examples. Where a KC customer calls their neighbour (residential or business) who also has a KC line, the call will be free. However, if the neighbour has a cable (Virgin Media) line, then the call will be chargeable (a toll will ensue). Similarly, calls are chargeable to businesses whose provider is Cable & Wireless. All these numbers, whether KC or another provider, are 01482 ones, but they are not all charged the same. Are there any time length restrictions on free intra Hull calls with KC?

No.

The KC Price Manual shows that the only types of calls that have length restrictions of 60 minutes when they are inclusive are non-geographic numbers 0845 and 0870.

Local KC, local non-KC, regional and national calls have no call length restrictions when inclusive.



idb wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 12:43am:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 15th, 2010 at 12:11am: idb wrote on Feb 14th, 2010 at 4:01pm: Something else to consider - if I decided to spend some time in say Seattle, some 2700 miles from West Palm Beach, and take my cell phone along, the call from our home phone to my cell phone would be considered a local call. So yes, the phrase 'local call' is not necessarily what one may think. With you so far, but how does the cell operator in Seattle get paid, if not from the call charge. In Europe there are roaming charges paid by the recipient if you use your cell phone out of the area (country) to which it belongs . To some extent, roaming charges still exist here, however many, perhaps most, cellular plans now include roaming (let's not go down the 'free' roaming route) in a typical bundled national plan. So, illustrated again by example, my specific plan, FamilyTalk Nation 700 Rollover & Unlimited Night/Weekend & Unlimited Mobile-To-Mobile Minutes, its grand title, provides 700 'anytime' minutes, unlimited calls from AT&T mobile to AT&T mobile, unlimited nights and weekend calls, long distance at no surcharge and free roaming on AT&T networks nationwide.

So roaming on another AT&T network does not incur any higher charges than when on your home AT&T network. That means that in effect AT&T has one big network where subscribers can move anywhere within its coverage and not be charged higher rates when not connected to their local one. This would appear to defeat the object of carving the country up into LATAs. Do they apply to mobile operators or just fixed line providers?

But if you're going to a place that is served by a different operator then presumably you will incur some sort of charge for roaming. And what about others who are with other network providers? What happens when they roam in areas where they don't have their own local network? Do most operators have networks in many different areas?

It sounds to me like it's the luck of the draw as to where you live and whether you are able to move about a large part of the country without paying roaming charges or not.

[Dave - thanks for splitting the topic]


Dave wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 12:02pm:

I have read about and appreciate "intraLATA" (within the same LATA) and "interLATA" (crosses boundary between two LATAs) terms. From what I can understand, it would appear that the LATAs have been drawn around the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs) to prevent them from providing connections between different LATAs. So where the same RBOC operates the network in neighbouring LATAs, it is restricted in that it cannot provide a link between the two and must yield to another provider, a IXC (InterXchange Carrier), for which there will be a cost. The term "local call (free)" would perhaps be clearer if it were just referred to as "local call" and most importantly, "local call (toll)" would be more easily understood if it were termed a "regional call". These terms are like what we used to have in the UK and actually mean something.

To be fair, the "local call (free)" and "local call (toll)" definitions above were simply used for illustrative purposes. It is unlikely that such definitions would be used in any general discussion by an average resident here! My point was to emphasize that there are some local calls that are free, and some that are charged. The comparison you make with regional calling is a valid and accurate one, and indeed, such definition of "regional" may well be evident. I was in Orlando last month, and a quick look in the local White Pages (a/k/a "phone book") from a non (Bell South)/AT&T provider did indeed refer to chargeable (ie not free) local calls  as "regional". In my area of AT&T land, chargeable local calls are referred to, by AT&T, as "extended local calling", although regional would appear to be a suitable alternative, and a reasonable analogy when comparing UK and US markets.

Notwithstanding the above, this is a large country with many different providers. Local calling is regulated by the appropriate State. What constitutes a local call, an enhanced call, a regional call, or whatever definition or description of a given call, and the rate that will be applicable, will be found within the best reference material available, which will usually be the provider's telephone directory.


Dave wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 12:02pm:

What about those who live near to LATA boundaries? For a call to a destination which is only a short distance from them but which is within another LATA, will it be classed as a type of "local" call or will it be a "long distance" one because it requires use of the IXC?

Local calls can often cross LATA boundaries. A call from Sebastian (eg 772-228-XXXX), at the far north of the Southeast Calling Zone [LATA#460] (which includes Miami) to Melbourne (eg 321-215-XXXX), within the Orlando Calling Zone [LATA#458], a distance of 21 miles, is a local call.

Dave wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 12:02pm:

So roaming on another AT&T network does not incur any higher charges than when on your home AT&T network. That means that in effect AT&T has one big network where subscribers can move anywhere within its coverage and not be charged higher rates when not connected to their local one. This would appear to defeat the object of carving the country up into LATAs. Do they apply to mobile operators or just fixed line providers?

The AT&T network is considered as one national entity. My understanding is that wasn't always the case. Having been a customer of AT&T and its predecessor Cingular Wireless since 2005, I have not incurred any domestic roaming costs, even though my bill would itemize domestic roaming calls, which were free/inclusive. I have no idea how LATAs relate to cellular operators, and will do further research. I suspect LATAs only have relevance to the Regional Bell Operating Companies.



Dave wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 12:02pm:

But if you're going to a place that is served by a different operator then presumably you will incur some sort of charge for roaming. And what about others who are with other network providers? What happens when they roam in areas where they don't have their own local network? Do most operators have networks in many different areas?

As far as I am aware, an AT&T wireless customer, such as myself, cannot roam domestically on any other GSM network. With other operators, perhaps with the non GSM systems, it may well be possible - I really do not know. When I tried Verizon for a week or so, domestic roaming was an important aspect, and could be chargeable, however as the network was not strong within my area, I didn't research the matter. After mergers and acquisitions, there are now only four major players in the US cellular market - AT&T, Nextel/Sprint, Verizon and T-Mobile. There is a handful of other regional providers, for example MetroPCS, and various virtual operators such as Virgin USA. There may well be roaming arrangements between the regional providers and other regional providers, and perhaps even between the major providers and the regional providers. I will look into this.



Dave wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 12:02pm:

It sounds to me like it's the luck of the draw as to where you live and whether you are able to move about a large part of the country without paying roaming charges or not.

AT&T and Verizon are fiercely competitive in terms of which has the greater coverage. Some of their commercials have resulted in lawsuits. Where one lives does indeed determine waht choices one will have.